Ahead of the final showdown for the 2025 F1 Drivers’ title, four-time IndyCar champion Álex Palou thinks Max Verstappen would have bagged the title a while ago. The Catalan driver echoed Verstappen’s own recent remarks in an interview with Mundo Deportivo, in which he also commented on his own missed opportunity at McLaren.
Verstappen would have won “title two months earlier”
Being former team mates in karting at CRG Kart, Palou knows how Verstappen races. He was certain that the Dutchman would have wrapped up the title in a McLaren ages ago. He wasn’t as confident in his own chances however.
“I always think that someone else is doing better,” Palou started off. “And I live with the paranoia of thinking that I’m not doing well enough. I think it’s a good thing, as long as you don’t overdo it.“
“Would I have been champion with McLaren? I think so, but I don’t know. I think I could have fought for it, but we’ll never know.
“Maybe I would have got in the car and been half a second slower. I’ve only driven it once, so it’s hard to say.”
Palou considers Verstappen to be the benchmark of the current F1 field, his skill being the only reason he is still in the title fight. So it is no wonder he thinks 70-time Grand Prix winner would have won it all weeks ago in a papaya car.
“Max with McLaren? Easily, yes, yes. He would have won weeks ago, two months earlier.
“Do I think I would have won? I’ll tell you yes, I could have fought, but I wouldn’t have won two months earlier.
“But Max is the only one who could have done it.’
‘Papaya rules‘ having an opposite effect
One of the more controversial items in the current F1 World Championship is the so-called ‘papaya rules’ strategy of McLaren. In short, it means that no driver is given advantage over the other.
A prime example is the team order given to Oscar Piastri to swap his place with Lando Norris during the Italian GP. Direct cause was a slow pit stop suffered by the Briton.
While understandable, Palou feels the decision has yielded the opposite of the desired effect.
“I think it’s being blown out of proportion,” he commented. “I think that in the end, they were in a position where they had by far the best car and wanted to be the friendly team, the team that does everything perfectly and takes care of its drivers.
“And in trying to do that, they have done the opposite and made everyone see that, in some way, they favour one over the other and wonder why this and why not that. I don’t think there’s that much of that, I don’t think there’s any favouritism, but it’s true that the ‘papaya rules’ haven’t worked for them.”
Monza team order part of the job
When looking back at the Monza-incident, Palou was clear about Piastri following up the team order. It is just something you do, as at the end of the day you are an employee of the team.
“At that moment, because of a pit stop at Monza… well, that’s how it is. If they tell you to do it, you do it because, at the end of the day, you’re working for them. You can argue, but ultimately, you’re there racing that car thanks to Chip Ganassi, in my case.
“I don’t know what I would have done, eh? From the outside, it’s very easy to say, ‘No, no, I’m second and he’s third, screw him, I’ll finish ahead of him.’ From the outside, it’s very easy to say, ‘No, no, I’m in first or second place.’ I don’t remember how they were going, but second and third, yes.
“But I think that at that moment, if you’re working for the factory, for the brand, for so many people, and they tell you to do that, in the end, you’re an employee.”
